VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wed, Apr 21 2004, 23:35:49
Author: MKIceman
Subject: Re: Um... confused
In reply to: Heywood 's message, "Re: Um... confused" on Wed, Apr 21 2004, 23:10:15

>>But that -- having to "deal with" anyone -- is the one
>>thing that doesn't matter here, since free-speech
>>means the option of writing whatever you want,
>
>Actually, no it doesn't. You've said you're American,
>check out what your Supreme Court and your
>constitution have said. Nor at any point was I ever
>bound by the American constitution.

If you wish to be semantic, it's the freedom of press, but The Site Guru uses the term "freedom of speech" when describing the GAFF boards.

If you refer to slander or libel, such allegations can only be prosecuted if they cause damage. Furthermore, such allegations are defined as verbal abuse (i.e., personal insults, derogatory remarks). This is why I am against flaming, and I have not flamed anyone here.

Regardless of your or anyone else's bounds, the restrictions (or lack thereof) emplaced upon the GAFF board is at the sole discretion of its provider (i.e., The Site Guru), is it not?

>> So no, no one has to "deal with" anyone,
>
>Keep telling yourself that as you go to work with your
>boss and coworkers. Pick one, preferably your boss,
>but in a pinch, a coworker on an important project
>might do. If you don't have to "deal with" him/her,
>then tell him/her exactly how much the toupee or
>haircut sucks, how much weight he or she has gained,
>what that outfit makes him/her look like, how bad
>his/her breath smells, and how much you dislike him or
>her for their last decision. (Basically, insert
>something applicable for the person). Hell, you might
>even tell them to "fuck off". Granted, that last one
>was extreme, but it was still a continuation of the
>theme.

While nicely reasoned, you, once again, missed the context of the statement: it refers this board.

>Once you've done that and seen what happens, _then_
>tell me that your relationship with them hasn't
>changed, that everything is 100% the same all the time.

I have no relationship with anyone on this board, nor do I feel compelled to cultivate one.

>If you don't "deal with" people, then you'll probably
>find yourself leading a much lonelier life than was
>necessary. And that's what I've found in a lot of
>posts, speaking to you. You don't seem to get (or if
>you do, you don't seem to use) social graces and
>niceties. You yourself derided things like tact.

First, this is yet another personal insult that avoids the issue, commuting the argument to my methodology (i.e., use of tact). Yet I'll still bite.

While my personal affairs are none of your business, in the same way that your personal affairs are none of my business, I will reiterate that I have a few very close friends for whom I would do, and who would die for me. One of them is my lover.

Second, context: "the amount of tact used depends upon the topic and the participants involved."

Lastly, more context: what medium are we discussing? I refer to this board, which -- when it comes to my own use of tact -- can be widened to the Internet in general. You have never met me nor have you seen how I conduct such social niceties -- or tactlessness, as required -- in real.

>>and you're deluding yourself if you
>>think that upholding that statement can reconcile with
>>upholding freedom of speech.
>
>Matt, you don't seem to realize the social conventions
>surrounding freedom of speech, what it is, and that
>sometimes just because you _can_ say something doesn't
>mean you _must_ say it. Ever heard of the phrases
>"taking the high road", "letting it slide", or
>"burying it"? Perhaps "playing nicely in the sandbox"?

I stated this before, in response to kind e-mails and (I think) in posts: I "let it slide" on the InvisionFree board when it became clear to me that this is how the GAFF board evolved. Your response to the original discussion provided the catalyst for my somewhat subtle posting (i.e., turning it from somewhat subtle to blatantly obvious), but, again, I "let it slide" when it became clear to me that you were not going to comment on my comments. Now this comes up yet again, and I am not going to "let slide" misinterpretations of my views or intentions.

If you're hoping for this to die down so you don't have to accept mistakes, fine: as I posted in response to Catseye, I don't have any intention of starting this afresh. I didn't bring this up, but, not only was the issue brought up, but my name was also dragged into it. I won't bring up this old issue, but I will respond if others bring it up in such a fashion as to misinterpret or impersonate me. That is, until the issue is resolved once and for all.

--Matt

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:





Forum timezone: GMT-3
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.